Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

Queer people of faith

Posted on: April 7, 2011 - 11:11pm

wingless_sephiroth

Posts: 117

Joined: 2011-04-03

Offline

Queer people of faith

As a total faggot, I sometimes wish I was born earlier, before the AIDS epidemic began. Why? Because, at that point in history, being queer also meant you were a skeptic and freethinker, if not a downright atheist. The guy you were fucking wouldn't have to take a condom out of his ass and go to church the next morning.

After the AIDS epidemic, we saw lots of gay men running back to faith. This is when the gay-friendly churches were founded, later to be follow by the gay Jewish and gay Muslim help groups.

As someone who was president of my university's queer organization, and someone who has been relatively active in the community (ie, sleeps around a a shitload), I will certainly say that queer people of faith outnumber those who are freethinkers. We even have queers who are "waiting for marriage." The only thing I'd say is notable is the high amounts of New Age faiths, such as Wicca.

Now, there was a good two years where my religion and my queerness overlapped, and that was because I couldn't think of a rational way to reject my religious beliefs, and my understanding of Islam had always been rather liberal anyway. But, when I did find a way out, oh boy did I jump off that boat.

So, honestly, for other queers here, or others with at least some vague familiarity with the community, does the high amount of religious folk these days bother you? Unlike me, not all of them want a way out of faith. Certainly they're not as dogmatic as the straight ones, but still, why do they resign themselves to religious groups, where 90% of the believers find their lifestyle and feelings an abomination, as opposed to a philosophical position that almost anyone who holds it affirms their rights? It's just moronic.

Thats why I called you out. I doubt anyone here really thinks even for one moment I was actually comparing being gay to any of that. You fuking pussy bleeding heart bastard. So afraid to see anything unpolitically cis to Christianityorrect that might even possibly make being gay seem "bad". Trying to infer that being gay had anything to do with any of that caused you to totally miss the point. You are so far out in left field you can't see the ball even if it did fly out your way. I could go on but I'll let you stew in this.

Proofread and think before you accuse someone of some stupid shit.

"Oh maybe he was just making an example of the way the other side might be thinking instead of trash talking and actually comparing being gay to sucking blood from goats ..ooh I get it."

Yes I did some name calling, it's appropriate though.

What Jean is to Christianity Brian is to political correctness.

You know, someone who represents their pov in such an over the top manner that you have to stop and ask yourself if anyone could really be that bat shit insane about a cause. If I wasn't already familiar with Brian I would swear that he was a poe.

Yea well political correctness is a pet peeve of mine. It's a form of fukin mind control.

Wow. None of this is about political correctness. This is about your word choice and your failure to see that it can be taken the wrong way. If you say I am taking it the wrong way, then maybe you should make clear what you are saying when talking about gays and starting a paragraph depicting beasteality.

YOU talked about other people trying to sell you something which implies(in the way it reads) that gays are trying to sell you something and used those descriptions in conjunction while talking about gays.

AND ONCE AGAIN, if you didn't mean that, then maybe you could have done better by using a different example in your comparisson of HOW people should go about selling ANYTHING.

This is about YOUR delivery not political correctness. OTHERWISE I wouldn't have said, "if you didn't mean that", instead I would have said, "DON'T EVER SAY THINGS LIKE THAT EVER". I would have made demands, not ask for clarification.

But "Political correctness" certainly is an easy term to turn into an ad homin to throw at someone when they have something to hide, or no argument at all. THATS when people use ad homins.

You do realize in this thread I called a gay person Tinkerbell? And said "EWE EWE EWE you are not like me".

If I were "Politically correct" I would not joke with a gay person like that.

So if this is merely about ME misconstruing what you said then "political correctness" is a superfluous jab that adds nothing to any criticism you might have and can only mean that there is something about yourself that you are ignoring that you need to face.

Maybe what you mean by "Political correctness" is "I don't have to like gay people".

NOW ONCE AGAIN, IF THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU MEAN BY "Political correctness", then explain.

Quote:

Proofread and think before you accuse someone of some stupid shit.

Calling me "Politically correct" is pretty stupid. And if you think before you hit submit, maybe there would be no misunderstanding.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

Thats why I called you out. I doubt anyone here really thinks even for one moment I was actually comparing being gay to any of that. You fuking pussy bleeding heart bastard. So afraid to see anything unpolitically cis to Christianityorrect that might even possibly make being gay seem "bad". Trying to infer that being gay had anything to do with any of that caused you to totally miss the point. You are so far out in left field you can't see the ball even if it did fly out your way. I could go on but I'll let you stew in this.

Proofread and think before you accuse someone of some stupid shit.

"Oh maybe he was just making an example of the way the other side might be thinking instead of trash talking and actually comparing being gay to sucking blood from goats ..ooh I get it."

Yes I did some name calling, it's appropriate though.

What Jean is to Christianity Brian is to political correctness.

You know, someone who represents their pov in such an over the top manner that you have to stop and ask yourself if anyone could really be that bat shit insane about a cause. If I wasn't already familiar with Brian I would swear that he was a poe.

He's the self-appointed Messiah of political correctness.

I don't know about PCness, BUT HE DOES USE RRS AS A PEDESTAL AND SOAPBOX FOR HIS MORALITY, TYPING LIKE THIS. I figure, there isn't an audience for this sort of crap in real life (at least not with his lack of interpersonal skill demonstrated online); what kind of audience can one expect online? 4 or 5 people, on a really good day?

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)

Thats why I called you out. I doubt anyone here really thinks even for one moment I was actually comparing being gay to any of that. You fuking pussy bleeding heart bastard. So afraid to see anything unpolitically cis to Christianityorrect that might even possibly make being gay seem "bad". Trying to infer that being gay had anything to do with any of that caused you to totally miss the point. You are so far out in left field you can't see the ball even if it did fly out your way. I could go on but I'll let you stew in this.

Proofread and think before you accuse someone of some stupid shit.

"Oh maybe he was just making an example of the way the other side might be thinking instead of trash talking and actually comparing being gay to sucking blood from goats ..ooh I get it."

Yes I did some name calling, it's appropriate though.

What Jean is to Christianity Brian is to political correctness.

You know, someone who represents their pov in such an over the top manner that you have to stop and ask yourself if anyone could really be that bat shit insane about a cause. If I wasn't already familiar with Brian I would swear that he was a poe.

Yea well political correctness is a pet peeve of mine. It's a form of fukin mind control.

Wow. None of this is about political correctness. This is about your word choice and your failure to see that it can be taken the wrong way. If you say I am taking it the wrong way, then maybe you should make clear what you are saying when talking about gays and starting a paragraph depicting beasteality.

YOU talked about other people trying to sell you something which implies(in the way it reads) that gays are trying to sell you something and used those descriptions in conjunction while talking about gays.

AND ONCE AGAIN, if you didn't mean that, then maybe you could have done better by using a different example in your comparisson of HOW people should go about selling ANYTHING.

This is about YOUR delivery not political correctness. OTHERWISE I wouldn't have said, "if you didn't mean that", instead I would have said, "DON'T EVER SAY THINGS LIKE THAT EVER". I would have made demands, not ask for clarification.

But "Political correctness" certainly is an easy term to turn into an ad homin to throw at someone when they have something to hide, or no argument at all. THATS when people use ad homins.

You do realize in this thread I called a gay person Tinkerbell? And said "EWE EWE EWE you are not like me".

If I were "Politically correct" I would not joke with a gay person like that.

So if this is merely about ME misconstruing what you said then "political correctness" is a superfluous jab that adds nothing to any criticism you might have and can only mean that there is something about yourself that you are ignoring that you need to face.

Maybe what you mean by "Political correctness" is "I don't have to like gay people".

NOW ONCE AGAIN, IF THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU MEAN BY "Political correctness", then explain.

Quote:

Proofread and think before you accuse someone of some stupid shit.

Calling me "Politically correct" is pretty stupid. And if you think before you hit submit, maybe there would be no misunderstanding.

What I said stands, you rub it in even further and (let me amuse kap here) STILL FAIL TO SEE THE POINT FOR THE PC YOU TRY TO IMPOSE.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm not quite a noob on the forum and I have read most of Bryan's posts, Kap is actually correct in good part and Bryan is like a freakin rottweiler for political correctness. He is as far left in general as anyone on this forum.

Bryan was the only one who seriously seemed to "take offense" at something I said that really had no actual bearing on what he wanted to make it out to be.

I explained it twice, the second time so a 6 year old might even understand it and he still does not want* to get it.

I feel bad for him for having such a narrow field of view.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm not quite a noob on the forum and I have read most of Bryan's posts, Kap is actually correct in good part and Bryan is like a freakin rottweiler for political correctness. He is as far left in general as anyone on this forum.

Bryan was the only one who seriously seemed to "take offense" at something I said that really had no actual bearing on what he wanted to make it out to be.

I explained it twice, the second time so a 6 year old might even understand it and he still does not want* to get it.

I feel bad for him for having such a narrow field of view.

Even if you are correct, which I'm not one to judge, I'm not sure you're approaching this correctly. Perhaps you should attack his views, but not him personally, it's not a good segue for constructive dialogue. You guys are approaching this all wrong and making yourselves seem petty.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm not quite a noob on the forum and I have read most of Bryan's posts, Kap is actually correct in good part and Bryan is like a freakin rottweiler for political correctness. He is as far left in general as anyone on this forum.

Bryan was the only one who seriously seemed to "take offense" at something I said that really had no actual bearing on what he wanted to make it out to be.

I explained it twice, the second time so a 6 year old might even understand it and he still does not want* to get it.

I feel bad for him for having such a narrow field of view.

Even if you are correct, which I'm not one to judge, I'm not sure you're approaching this correctly. Perhaps you should attack his views, but not him personally, it's not a good segue for constructive dialogue. You guys are approaching this all wrong and making yourselves seem petty.

When this arguement comes to a close I'm sure we will still discuss things either way. It is the internet after all and actual hard feelings are petty here.

If nothing else our mutual agreement on atheism in general is likely enough to keep us bedfellows and on the bright side it shows diversity amongst us.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

The tea party is an excellent example, you should look around and reevaluate their current perfomance in the polls.

You mean, like, the polls where you have, like, a tea party candidate who is actually running on tea party issues? As compared to the atheist candida... woops, I forgot, there are no atheist candidates.

Look at reality with reality-goggles, not robj-goggles. The reality is that the tea party, who are fuckin nutbars, are nevertheless a huge political force in the US, even if they happen to suck at some polls. They're IN the fuckin polls! That's a lot better than we're doing, so far.

I think, perhaps, that your country is soooo fucked up that you can't really see it the way an outsider sees it. Just a thought.

Quote:

However to claim my strategy is patently bad based on one group of obvious knuckle dragging chimps is ..bad but so appropriate at the same time.

You think they're the only example? Man, get a grip. Discover reality.

The tea party is an excellent example, you should look around and reevaluate their current perfomance in the polls.

You mean, like, the polls where you have, like, a tea party candidate who is actually running on tea party issues? As compared to the atheist candida... woops, I forgot, there are no atheist candidates.

Look at reality with reality-goggles, not robj-goggles. The reality is that the tea party, who are fuckin nutbars, are nevertheless a huge political force in the US, even if they happen to suck at some polls. They're IN the fuckin polls! That's a lot better than we're doing, so far.

I think, perhaps, that your country is soooo fucked up that you can't really see it the way an outsider sees it. Just a thought.

Quote:

However to claim my strategy is patently bad based on one group of obvious knuckle dragging chimps is ..bad but so appropriate at the same time.

You think they're the only example? Man, get a grip. Discover reality.

I never said anything about an atheist candidate.

You were the one who proposed the tea party not I.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

The tea party is an excellent example, you should look around and reevaluate their current perfomance in the polls.

You mean, like, the polls where you have, like, a tea party candidate who is actually running on tea party issues? As compared to the atheist candida... woops, I forgot, there are no atheist candidates.

Look at reality with reality-goggles, not robj-goggles. The reality is that the tea party, who are fuckin nutbars, are nevertheless a huge political force in the US, even if they happen to suck at some polls. They're IN the fuckin polls! That's a lot better than we're doing, so far.

I think, perhaps, that your country is soooo fucked up that you can't really see it the way an outsider sees it. Just a thought.

Quote:

However to claim my strategy is patently bad based on one group of obvious knuckle dragging chimps is ..bad but so appropriate at the same time.

You think they're the only example? Man, get a grip. Discover reality.

I never said anything about an atheist candidate.

You were the one who proposed the tea party not I.

Give us another example of a radical group who tries to push several agenda's on one plate.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

Actually an openly gay atheist candidate for prez would be a good example. An atheist candidate would be rough, a gay candidate would be rough, now put the two together and you will have something far greater than the sum of it's parts as far as the christian majority are concerned. Either of the two is bad but both at the same time? Unthinkable!

Maybe that will help explain my view a bit.

Some of the people here seem to think taking it all and rubbing it in their face at the same time is a great idea and will make for progress. I do not, one step at a time imo.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

Actually an openly gay atheist candidate for prez would be a good example. An atheist candidate would be rough, a gay candidate would be rough, now put the two together and you will have something far greater than the sum of it's parts as far as the christian majority are concerned. Either of the two is bad but both at the same time? Unthinkable!

Maybe that will help explain my view a bit.

No, it doesn't actually.

Your idea that gay atheists should not exercise their civil rights, and flaunt their 'victories' over their long standing castigation, and persecutions, is a bad one.

A really bad one.

They're human.

Whether they're atheists, or not, they're human.

With inalienable rights.

They used to be executed for being gay. The laws worldwide on this issue, are still completely whacked, IMO.

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm not quite a noob on the forum and I have read most of Bryan's posts, Kap is actually correct in good part and Bryan is like a freakin rottweiler for political correctness. He is as far left in general as anyone on this forum.

Bryan was the only one who seriously seemed to "take offense" at something I said that really had no actual bearing on what he wanted to make it out to be.

I explained it twice, the second time so a 6 year old might even understand it and he still does not want* to get it.

I feel bad for him for having such a narrow field of view.

I defended the Pastors right to burn a Koran. I am not for silencing dissent, and even with Jean I also defend his right to spew his bullshit.

People offend atheists here all the time equating us to Hitler and Stalin. If I were politically correct I would not be a member of this website. Plenty of "lefties" both theists and atheists don't hang out here because this website does not censor people.

Again, I don't know where you get off falsely accusing me of political correctness WHEN all I did was ask for clarification and suggest that if you didn't mean it the way it came across maybe different examples would have helped.

Maybe your anger at me has nothing to do with gays maybe I am touching on other issues you hold that you are taking personally.

And FYI, it doesn't matter to me how many people read my posts. But obviously you care enough to read them. No one is forcing you to read my posts or respond to my posts.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm not quite a noob on the forum and I have read most of Bryan's posts, Kap is actually correct in good part and Bryan is like a freakin rottweiler for political correctness. He is as far left in general as anyone on this forum.

Bryan was the only one who seriously seemed to "take offense" at something I said that really had no actual bearing on what he wanted to make it out to be.

I explained it twice, the second time so a 6 year old might even understand it and he still does not want* to get it.

I feel bad for him for having such a narrow field of view.

Even if you are correct, which I'm not one to judge, I'm not sure you're approaching this correctly. Perhaps you should attack his views, but not him personally, it's not a good segue for constructive dialogue. You guys are approaching this all wrong and making yourselves seem petty.

When this arguement comes to a close I'm sure we will still discuss things either way. It is the internet after all and actual hard feelings are petty here.

If nothing else our mutual agreement on atheism in general is likely enough to keep us bedfellows and on the bright side it shows diversity amongst us.

You criticized me, don't do that, you are not allowed to, It offends me. Oh wait, I forgot, saying "You're wrong" is the same as "don't say that".

But this IS the one thing we do agree on. If anything it does show that atheists are not clones of each other. Or is this just another one of my "soapbox" moments?

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson

Actually an openly gay atheist candidate for prez would be a good example. An atheist candidate would be rough, a gay candidate would be rough, now put the two together and you will have something far greater than the sum of it's parts as far as the christian majority are concerned. Either of the two is bad but both at the same time? Unthinkable!

Maybe that will help explain my view a bit.

No, it doesn't actually.

Your idea that gay atheists should not exercise their civil rights, and flaunt their 'victories' over their long standing castigation, and persecutions, is a bad one.

A really bad one.

They're human.

Whether they're atheists, or not, they're human.

With inalienable rights.

They used to be executed for being gay. The laws worldwide on this issue, are still completely whacked, IMO.

I must be wrong since no one agrees with me on this, either that or or no one is seeing it in the same light. I never said a gay atheist should not "exercise their civil rights" I said it's harder for people to accept when they "let it all hang out". Turning this into a "rights" thing rather than a "common sense" thing, but whatever it takes for you to beat my view.

Either way I'll still be disappointed when I see a gay atheist touting atheism because for the religious it proves them right in much the way a teabagger criticizing a gay would prove you right.

Who's that on youtube zinniajones? An example. He does fine talking about gay rights and all but when he talks of atheism how many christians really watch him and consider anything? "hey look at me I'm everything you hate, now listen ..."

But again I must be wrong in this whole issue.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

btw, Brian is definitely not far left. my first encounter with him on this forum a couple years ago was when he cussed me out for wanting to tear up the american constitution (revolutionally speaking) because it protects private property.

but yeah, he does get way too happy with the caps. then again, i recall kapkao overusing caps on several occassions too.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson

btw, Brian is definitely not far left. my first encounter with him on this forum a couple years ago was when he cussed me out for wanting to tear up the american constitution (revolutionally speaking) because it protects private property.

but yeah, he does get way too happy with the caps. then again, i recall kapkao overusing caps on several occassions too.

I have read too many of his posts, he has more fervor than anyone when attacking the conservative view and propogates the left view with equal zeal.

I considered for a moment picking through his past posts and playing the copy/paste game but I am much too lazy and it's not that important. Some others here probably agree with me on this one but most wont agree simply because somehow it will hurt his feelings or some such. I have actually been called "conservative" el oh el.

Btw the left and the right both tend to like the constitution.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
Ayn Rand

You aren't necessarily wrong about the point you made but on this forum you and I are political minorities. As minorities perhaps we should apply for some sort of legal protection and exploit our under represented status. You know, to offset the tyranny of the majority.

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
Ayn Rand

I'm a n00b on this forum and maybe shouldn't go further than this sentence. But, it's seems a tad extreme to start attacking an individual for an opinion by stating he has no interpersonal skills in the real world, craves for a gigantic soapbox, and putting him in the same sentence as that messiah complexed Jean Chauvin. The worst thing he did say amounted to, "You're wrong and I find those statements to be backwards and offensive," which is like what two or three other people also said.

Just saying. Also, waiting for Godwin's Law to be fulfilled. In the meanwhile, please, this thread is about nostalgia:

I'm not quite a noob on the forum and I have read most of Bryan's posts, Kap is actually correct in good part and Bryan is like a freakin rottweiler for political correctness. He is as far left in general as anyone on this forum.

Bryan was the only one who seriously seemed to "take offense" at something I said that really had no actual bearing on what he wanted to make it out to be.

I explained it twice, the second time so a 6 year old might even understand it and he still does not want* to get it.

I feel bad for him for having such a narrow field of view.

I defended the Pastors right to burn a Koran. I am not for silencing dissent, and even with Jean I also defend his right to spew his bullshit.

People offend atheists here all the time equating us to Hitler and Stalin. If I were politically correct I would not be a member of this website. Plenty of "lefties" both theists and atheists don't hang out here because this website does not censor people.

Again, I don't know where you get off falsely accusing me of political correctness WHEN all I did was ask for clarification and suggest that if you didn't mean it the way it came across maybe different examples would have helped.

Maybe your anger at me has nothing to do with gays maybe I am touching on other issues you hold that you are taking personally.

And FYI, it doesn't matter to me how many people read my posts. But obviously you care enough to read them. No one is forcing you to read my posts or respond to my posts.

You defend everyones right to do everything. You have the mindset that if it is legal we should do it and everything seems like it should be legal and if it is not then it should be despite any action/reaction common sense. That is a left position.

You get defensive such as in this very thread when you prefered to accuse me of correlating gays with some weird goat blood sucking shit.

I have no idea why I might be irritated with you hum.

The issue has nothing to do with "reading" your posts unless you are suggesting I not do so. You should be flattered that I do tend to actually read what people have to say wether I like it or not.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

You aren't necessarily wrong about the point you made but on this forum you and I are political minorities. As minorities perhaps we should apply for some sort of legal protection and exploit our under represented status. You know, to offset the tyranny of the majority.

Yea I'll call my lawyer

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
Ayn Rand

I'm more of an ass man myself ( trying to stay on the thread topic, thank you very much ). Those things look dangerous, it's all fun and games until you poke a fucking eye out. But I do enjoy looking at a good boob now and again. When my wife was pregnant she went up three cup sizes while she was breast feeding. Unfortunately I was also mostly cut off at that time... oh well, can't win them all.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson

There exists a spectrum within any political camp. Pick any US Democrat serving in the Federal government who self identifies as left wing and I'm pretty sure that they will never approach the threshold of what you most likely consider left wing. Historically LBJ, JFK, are considered left of center and all were virulently anti-communist in their policies, nevertheless they are not held upon as paragons of conservative orthodoxy.

"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
Ayn Rand

There exists a spectrum within any political camp. Pick any US Democrat serving in the Federal government who self identifies as left wing and I'm pretty sure that they will never approach the threshold of what you most likely consider left wing. Historically LBJ, JFK, are considered left of center and all were virulently anti-communist in their policies, nevertheless they are not held upon as paragons of conservative orthodoxy.

agreed. most "liberal" politicians in the US sound very conservative to europeans. still, i was reacting to brian being called "far" left. i think he would only be "far" left to ann coulter.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson

There exists a spectrum within any political camp. Pick any US Democrat serving in the Federal government who self identifies as left wing and I'm pretty sure that they will never approach the threshold of what you most likely consider left wing. Historically LBJ, JFK, are considered left of center and all were virulently anti-communist in their policies, nevertheless they are not held upon as paragons of conservative orthodoxy.

agreed. most "liberal" politicians in the US sound very conservative to europeans. still, i was reacting to brian being called "far" left. i think he would only be "far" left to ann coulter.

ann coulter is not even far right, she's just an idiot. I wouldn't give her credit for having any position other than her own "special" spot.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

Btw I think the issue I was discussing is quite important to the furthering of the cause of atheism and gay rights both. I almost posted this on another thread to try to get a "theist" to post here about it but chickened out and opted instead to simply copy/paste what I was going to say:

___

I would however appreciate your getting on the queer thread and verifying my statement about it being hard for a religious person to debate and truly consider one's position when they are throwing out multiple items that you do not agree with. My own experience as a youngster wanting to believe in jesus would have kept me away from an individual that proposed they were both atheist and gay. In my mind they would have been atheist because they were going against god by being gay and likely "hated" god for some reason. If you are indeed a christian I'm certain you would agree with this assesment or at least about most christians in general.

I doubt that you would though now that I think on it, you would possibly be helping some atheists and gays understand a better way to confront the religious.

___

To me this is an important issue and the way we present ourselves to the majority* does matter.

Where one might listen and debate with thunderfoot on atheism or one might debate with zinniajones on gay rights when you put the two together not only does it not make sense (as we all know atheism has nothing to do with being gay) It will scare off most religious people and bias them even further on both issues. I think if you want actual progress don't put them together. Do a google or yahoo search on "gay atheist" and tell me it's not an issue.

You hard left people want to turn it into a "rights" thing yes you have the right but as a moderate I see where there are times when it may not be so wise to exercise every freakin right you have just because you want too. I have the right to express my atheism but if I run around procaliming it here I will quickly be ostracized by my own family even. I poke and jab now and then, I insinuate and comment now and then and I think I have made a bit of progress at least with people I know. They accept that I am an atheist and who knows with a little more time and effort they may come to understand more about it.

I think of the greater good and progress towards a better world is in moderation. I realize a lot of people disagree and want to proclaim it all and expect results today, I just don't think that's realistic, it actually seems childish.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

I sort of guessed I would be there - I took a similar test some years ago and I haven't changed much. The current hot buttons have changed and the questions reflect that.

Everyone here is likely to the left, I do think if you are an atheist you tend to be more liberal though the degree will vary greatly but again, most will be left and I expect many to be hard left. Bryan is so outspoken on his leftness it wouldn't suprise me if his graph actually read to the right lmao.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin

Yeah. The forum faggot is more right-wing than the lot of you, with your unattractive females and light beers. BRB while I go build super adorable shopping malls over various holy places in the Middle East, making a shitwad of cash while being just so fucking cute. It ain't capitalism unless you're getting fucked in the ass.

And, I quote Abu Nuwas;

"Comparing a man to a woman; I cannot see.And how, how can you mix up some bitch,Who goes into monthly heatAnd drops a litter once a year,With boys of such beauty, that I am left without words?"

And Rob, as when you first got into a discussion on homosexuality, the most troubling thing is the sort of acts you bring up as some sort of comparison or examples. They always seem to be things that are way-over-the-top offensive, as others have mentioned. It really suggests your gut reaction to homosexuality is extreme, and you are trying to justify it.

Yeah. The forum faggot is more right-wing than the lot of you, with your unattractive females and light beers.

hey, fuck off, you goddamn tosser! i currently live in a country with a global reputation for some of the most beautiful women and best beer in the world. "light" beer over here means beer that isn't black. it rarely comes in quantities of less than half a liter, and two or three of those will give a roaring buzz to most grown men.

as for the women, well, i married one, and the only complaint i have is that i can't sleep with a whole slew of others. i never see a morbidly obese woman until i return to the US, and even the overweight ones here are rarely under 40.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson

Yeah. The forum faggot is more right-wing than the lot of you, with your unattractive females and light beers.

hey, fuck off, you goddamn tosser! i currently live in a country with a global reputation for some of the most beautiful women and best beer in the world. "light" beer over here means beer that isn't black. it rarely comes in quantities of less than half a liter, and two or three of those will give a roaring buzz to most grown men.

as for the women, well, i married one, and the only complaint i have is that i can't sleep with a whole slew of others. i never see a morbidly obese woman until i return to the US, and even the overweight ones here are rarely under 40.

I prefer raki, at 50%; in the Middle East it's known as lion milk, I don't need to dilute it because my mouth is used to much rougher things. As far as beer, as long as you're in Europe, I respect your beer drinking. You Europeans produce good shit. It's just that in the States most straight men drink flat soda Coors or Bud Light. If gays can't tie the whole atheist thing with their identity, straight American men shouldn't be allowed to mention being a male and beer drinker in the same sentence, unless they are part of an enlightened Elect.

Also, thanks for bringing it up, because you straights are undersexed. I can't count how many times my friends see an amazingly beautiful girl, and know in their hearts they'll never get to fuck her. How do you live with that? And how often does that happen for a gay man? If you're in shape, know how to shave, and are a tad ethnic you can fuck any beautiful gay guy. And it'll take a 12 pack at most. Imagine knowing any hot woman is an easy lay. That is how it feels to be fit gay. Every damn day.

But even with the most horrendous (straight words, not mine, they're all horrendous to me) looking female, you have to go through the courting process. Dates, flowers, chocolate, over the span of a month. And often, sometimes you begin the relationship without even a fucking test drive, and sometimes you won't get to test drive until months in! What the fuck is this shit? What do you do when you need a quick lay but consider prostitution immoral? It seems you can't just go to a club and pick up any mediocre bitch, that's for sure.

I don't know. If sexuality wasn't a choice, I wouldn't pick dealing with women. I'm an ardent radical feminist, but from a relationship perspective, society makes straight (and lesbian) women into scary and emasculating things. Among lesbians it's actually a spectacle: we have a joke in the queer community along the lines of a lesbian can't go to a bar and find a lady quickly, because the girl she finds won't be able to get a U-Haul truck to move into her apartment that late at night. Why doesn't Western society begin teaching women, that along with the structural and innate patriarchy they need to overcome to make this world better for both sexes, that men or women just want to be with them emotionally and physically, not hand the keys of their soul and accompanying existential dilemma to a single female for the next five decades?

But even with the most horrendous (straight words, not mine, they're all horrendous to me) looking female, you have to go through the courting process. Dates, flowers, chocolate, over the span of a month. And often, sometimes you begin the relationship without even a fucking test drive, and sometimes you won't get to test drive until months in! What the fuck is this shit? What do you do when you need a quick lay but consider prostitution immoral? It seems you can't just go to a club and pick up any mediocre bitch, that's for sure.

*ring ring, ring ring , what's that? yes I'll take a message.

Hey, Wingless, the 1950's called, they want their antiquated ideas on courtship back. And it said you ever misuse it again, there will be hell to pay.

Dude, before ,when I was single... let's just leave it at that. My sex life didn't resemble anything you're describing lol. A lot more active and spontaneous.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc

But even with the most horrendous (straight words, not mine, they're all horrendous to me) looking female, you have to go through the courting process. Dates, flowers, chocolate, over the span of a month. And often, sometimes you begin the relationship without even a fucking test drive, and sometimes you won't get to test drive until months in! What the fuck is this shit? What do you do when you need a quick lay but consider prostitution immoral? It seems you can't just go to a club and pick up any mediocre bitch, that's for sure.

??? If your confident, funny, and have a little game none of this is the case. Infact I find it far too easy to get girls, all you do is make them laugh and don't act like their better than you, the rest is nature. I found it much more difficult to find one I actually liked.

In conclusion, the straight men I know are complete and total losers. Thanks for the clarification.

Still. That doesn't explain the Stalin-esque monogamy laws you adhere to, but many of you would prefer not to. But, once again, maybe some gay guy in his 30s will come into this topic and talk about how he can't even think about his husband looking at another guy and blah... ruin everything.

I kinda admire the really radical gays who were against gay marriage, saying that we shouldn't import a straight institution that initially began as a way to appropriate women to their owners.

I'm probably only talking like this because I'm the verge of hitting 22 and are trying to keep what's left of my youthful radicalism and disdain for the system.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare

In conclusion, the straight men I know are complete and total losers. Thanks for the clarification.

Still. That doesn't explain the Stalin-esque monogamy laws you adhere to, but many of you would prefer not to. But, once again, maybe some gay guy in his 30s will come into this topic and talk about how he can't even think about his husband looking at another guy and blah... ruin everything.

I kinda admire the really radical gays who were against gay marriage, saying that we shouldn't import a straight institution that initially began as a way to appropriate women to their owners.

I'm probably only talking like this because I'm the verge of hitting 22 and are trying to keep what's left of my youthful radicalism and disdain for the system.

My concern with marriage is the related societal and tax laws. If you are not married you can not see your partner if they are in the ICU. If you are not married and you are raising children, one of you will not be admitted to the emergency room if your child is injured. If you are not married, you will have to pay a higher income tax rate even if your partner is disabled. And so on. It is the way our laws are written and I don't think it is far to anyone - even the people who are in "straight" relationships.

You are young enough you may not think any of this is very important - odds are, you will change your mind. Since the only options we have are to get older or die. When will we have rejuv treatments? I am so ready for one or two.

My preferred solution would be for the state to offer civil unions instead of marriage. Any number of people of any number of genders could enter into a civil union as long as everyone is adult and consenting. (Use the current legal definition of adult and consenting in your state/country.) You need to care for an elderly parent? Create a civil union and you won't have to file power of attorney and medical power of attorney and all that stuff. Simplifies inheritance. Cuts back on the required paperwork to the IRS for declaring a dependent. Do I care if people have civil unions with 40 other people or all one gender people or relatives? No.

Consenting. Adults.

You want to get married, contact your church. Strictly religious. Not legally binding regardless of your religious beliefs, no religious references in the law. That is, no laws that refer to "marriage" and therefore, to religion.

And I wasn't monogamous when young, but I am now. Too much effort to train a new one, and no one else would have me anyway.

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.

In conclusion, the straight men I know are complete and total losers. Thanks for the clarification.

Still. That doesn't explain the Stalin-esque monogamy laws you adhere to, but many of you would prefer not to. But, once again, maybe some gay guy in his 30s will come into this topic and talk about how he can't even think about his husband looking at another guy and blah... ruin everything.

I kinda admire the really radical gays who were against gay marriage, saying that we shouldn't import a straight institution that initially began as a way to appropriate women to their owners.

I'm probably only talking like this because I'm the verge of hitting 22 and are trying to keep what's left of my youthful radicalism and disdain for the system.

I don't have any need for marriage. If people want to get married go ahead, if not don't, who cares. Manogomy is something that works for some people, and it doesn't work for others, neither is "right" or "wrong." The only thing I find to be douchbaggerish is entering into a commitment with someone, and then breaking your commitment to them. So if you want to be a swinger, find a swinger partner. If you are the type that needs someone all to yourself, find a partner that shares those values. It seems pretty simple to me. During my sigle life I never lied to the girls I was with, I told them straight up I wasn't looking for relationships at the time (interestingly enough that seemed to make me more irresistable looking at me as some kind of challenge or something). Now If I tell a girl I do want to be with her exclusively and expect the same, we should both keep to our commitments. If one wants to see other people, you should break up honestly before doing so. I'm a little of both people, when I was single and I was all over the place with all kinds of girls and had no real feelings for them, I felt no jealousy, no need to have any of them all to myself, no need for manogamy, I never really dated at all it seemed pointless to me. But when a long term friendship (10 years before crossing the line) turned into a relationship, I did feel these things because I cared very deeply for the girl, and I made it very clear of what my expectations were. To sum it up:

Do whatever works best for you, just don't decieve people in the process.

In conclusion, the straight men I know are complete and total losers. Thanks for the clarification.

Still. That doesn't explain the Stalin-esque monogamy laws you adhere to, but many of you would prefer not to. But, once again, maybe some gay guy in his 30s will come into this topic and talk about how he can't even think about his husband looking at another guy and blah... ruin everything.

I kinda admire the really radical gays who were against gay marriage, saying that we shouldn't import a straight institution that initially began as a way to appropriate women to their owners.

I'm probably only talking like this because I'm the verge of hitting 22 and are trying to keep what's left of my youthful radicalism and disdain for the system.

My concern with marriage is the related societal and tax laws. If you are not married you can not see your partner if they are in the ICU. If you are not married and you are raising children, one of you will not be admitted to the emergency room if your child is injured. If you are not married, you will have to pay a higher income tax rate even if your partner is disabled. And so on. It is the way our laws are written and I don't think it is far to anyone - even the people who are in "straight" relationships.

You are young enough you may not think any of this is very important - odds are, you will change your mind. Since the only options we have are to get older or die. When will we have rejuv treatments? I am so ready for one or two.

My preferred solution would be for the state to offer civil unions instead of marriage. Any number of people of any number of genders could enter into a civil union as long as everyone is adult and consenting. (Use the current legal definition of adult and consenting in your state/country.) You need to care for an elderly parent? Create a civil union and you won't have to file power of attorney and medical power of attorney and all that stuff. Simplifies inheritance. Cuts back on the required paperwork to the IRS for declaring a dependent. Do I care if people have civil unions with 40 other people or all one gender people or relatives? No.

Consenting. Adults.

You want to get married, contact your church. Strictly religious. Not legally binding regardless of your religious beliefs, no religious references in the law. That is, no laws that refer to "marriage" and therefore, to religion.

And I wasn't monogamous when young, but I am now. Too much effort to train a new one, and no one else would have me anyway.

Can't argue with a thing you said. And growing up is what I'll have to do anyway.

One of the huge problems in the gay community, even after the AIDS epidemic, and to this day is the cult of youth. Since many keep their anti-monogamy positions, they get old and unattractive and find that they can no longer find individuals willing to have sexual or emotional relationships with them. They often commit suicide, directly or indirectly, at that point.

You get defensive such as in this very thread when you prefered to accuse me of correlating gays with some weird goat blood sucking shit.

You are the one getting defensive.

Would you like me to post the paragraph again?

Gebus kristos on a cracker man. I SAID AND WILL NOT SAY AGAIN,

IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF you did not mean it that way, MAYBE you could have chosen a better example than what you did. Thats all, and at that point I was not accusing you of anything at that point. But after you jumped all over me for merely making a suggestion NOT A DEMAND. You went off on me, which makes me think YOU do have some "gut reaction" to gays that you are hiding or are unaware of.

And if I reallly was making too much of a big deal about it, I don't think you'd keep responding. Funny thing was AT THAT POINT, I wasn't.

But now I will make a big deal out of it.

Quote:

You defend everyones right to do everything. You have the mindset that if it is legal we should do it and everything seems like it should be legal and if it is not then it should be despite any action/reaction common sense. That is a left position.

Your true colors are showing. Your original objection wasn't about homosexuality being legal, it was about separating being gay from being atheist while selling the two. Now you say the above which IS about legality and not about selling anything. Why are you NOW talking about legality when your original objection was about "selling" and not mixing stuff when you sell?

If it is legal, who the fuck is making you do it? Tell me one gay person who wants to make you have gay sex by force of law?

Where did I say if it is legal you have to do it too. Homosexuality is legal, what is not legal is the denial of gays right to marry and have the same legal status as heterosexual couples. Gay marriage SHOULD be legal, and it is not. No one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to fuck a man. The mere sight of a gay person, talking to a gay person, or even shaking their hand wont make you magically gay nor will your prick fall off.

Do you think gay marriage should be illegal?

Or is it just the "flamers" you object to? In that case I still say get over it.

Should they be like your black neighbors, ask them to stay inside while you try to sell your house?

Or maybe you should get over your own insecurities.

I support full equality for gays, how that translates to "anything goes" is absurd. How supporting gay rights means you need to do what gays do, is absurd.

Fat women are allowed on the beach, just because they are doesn't mean a cop is going to force me to fuck them. But they have every right to be there.

Is that it? Gays should have rights so the next thing will be fucking chickens? AGAIN, if that is not what you are intending, I find it odd that you would go from describing the problem as "selling" to matters of law.

Is there something you think gays do that should be against the law? If not, then I am misunderstanding and am totally confused.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

In conclusion, the straight men I know are complete and total losers. Thanks for the clarification.

Still. That doesn't explain the Stalin-esque monogamy laws you adhere to, but many of you would prefer not to. But, once again, maybe some gay guy in his 30s will come into this topic and talk about how he can't even think about his husband looking at another guy and blah... ruin everything.

I kinda admire the really radical gays who were against gay marriage, saying that we shouldn't import a straight institution that initially began as a way to appropriate women to their owners.

I'm probably only talking like this because I'm the verge of hitting 22 and are trying to keep what's left of my youthful radicalism and disdain for the system.

I am not against marriage. I AM against how it is sold as a utopia, like a fairy tale. Selling it to society like it will solve the world's problems. With half of marriages ending in divorce, I just wish they'd skip "Till death do us part". It sets people up for an unrealistic view of life in that people change. And that meme can make a divorce really messy.

In reality marriages are merely financial contracts that deal with what happens with money in case of a divorce or death. Thats fine, but the religious crap and utopia crap really makes what amounts to a partnership contract on paper, and turns it into a princess fairy tale.

I consider myself lucky in that after all the dating before I got married, I was aware that things can change so I when I did get married I wasn't deluded in thinking it would last forever. I just went in thinking that I'll enjoy this as long as it lasts. It is always painful to feel rejection. But you cant force someone to have emotions they don't have. So in that respect, my x and I delt with it alot better than most people.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37